Hi! > > > > That sounds like fun. Changing bq27200-0 to bq27200_0 is > > > > Forbidden by > > > > the ABI Police, but taking the entire device away is ok. > > > > > > > No. IMO, it depends on if the interface is used or not. > > > If hwmon I/F is used, we can not take it away, nor change its name. > > Even if the use doesn't depend on that name ? > > > when I said "the interface is used", I mean the name string is used. > > > > > > If thermal zone I/F is used, we can not change it's 'type' name to > > > be > > > compatible with new hwmon API. > > > > > You mean you can not fix the name to be compatible with libsensors. > > > > We can try to convert it to a libsensor-compatible string, either for > hwmon only, or for both thermal and hwmon. But this is an ABI change, > right? > And my understanding about the ABI change is that, if no one cares > about it, we're okay, or else, this is a regression, and we need to > fall back to the previous ABI immediately. In order to change it in a > long run, we need to make a note in Documentation/ABI/, and change it > sometime in the future (a couple of release cycles or even more). If no one cares, you can get away with the change. So I guess that's what we should try. In -rc1. We should _not_ do "this changes in 2 years" dance, as that would increase chance for someone to use the old name. So I guess changing to libsensor-compatible name in v4.11-rc0 (maybe with note in the ABI documenation) is the best plan. If someone complains, we'll have to revert and think about something else. Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
